Meeting of the Parliament 13 March 2026 [Draft]
I very much note and accept the member’s point about different models. To draw on his comments, perhaps it is the case that different models have different strengths and weaknesses.
My amendments 275 to 277 and the amendments in the names of Bob Doris, Emma Roddick, Miles Briggs, Sue Webber and Murdo Fraser all attempt to bolster reporting and increase accountability. I consider that they are proportionate and that they will strengthen and complement reporting. However, I am also mindful of the comments that have been made about overlap and duplication.
That brings me on to issues that have been flagged in Oregon, where more than two thirds of the data have been found to be missing in reports on matters such as complications. Annual reporting has shown that, in practice, the application of the terminal illness threshold has expanded well beyond a normal understanding. Despite that being clear in annual reporting, issues have not been rectified. I doubt that that was the original intent of lawmakers. In fact, last year, in Washington state, they decided that, due to budget restrictions, they would drop annual reporting on their operation of assisted dying altogether. The evidence from abroad flags for us the issue that, even with the best reporting, incrementalist expansion and a lack of corrective action remain a risk. I draw members’ attention to amendments 289, 296 and 116, in the names of Stuart McMillan, Stephen Kerr and Sue Webber, which attempt to address the issue.
I, too, commend the Scottish Government’s suicide prevention strategy, which is world leading, as Kevin Stewart highlighted earlier. I had the privilege of supporting the development of that strategy in its fairly early format—and that was certainly not yesterday. The strategy is essential when it comes to issues such as the vulnerability of terminally ill people who are considering ending their own lives. We know that, with proper support, the desire to die diminishes.